Crime-politics nexus analysis

When Crime Pays: Money and Muscle in Indian Politics, Milan Vaishnav, Harper Collins Publishers; Rs.1,833, Pages 410 At a time when Bahubali of a cinematic kind is the buzzword in India, there’s another timely intervention on the topic, but of a political kind. Milan Vaishnav’s new book claims to be the first comprehensive study of the nexus between crime and democracy in India. The book explores the importance, capabilities and interestingly, the winnability of goondas, musclemen, criminals or as they are also sometimes called, Bahubalis, in Indian politics. The puzzle of rampant success and gradual entrenchment of politicians with criminal backgrounds in Indian politics has been frequently discussed in both academic and lay discourses.  How and why do criminals enter politics in India? Why do parties choose to nominate candidates with dubious backgrounds? Most of all, why do voters support candidates with serious criminal charges against them? These are some pertinent questions shaping the debate on the quality of democracy in India.  After General Election 2014, 21 percent of Members of Parliament had serious criminal charges against them. After the 2004 general election, this figure was around 12 percent. This includes politicians who face serious criminal charges ranging from kidnapping to abduction, threatening, intimidation and even murder. The phenomenon is seemingly more prevalent in the politics of the Hindi heartland. However, new data provides more insightful indications in a different direction. In the recently concluded assembly elections in the largely rural state of Uttar Pradesh, around 401 or 13 percent of candidates out of a total of over 3,000, faced charges of grave criminal offences against them. In the municipal elections of Mumbai, India’s largest metro and financial capital, 9 percent of the 1,641 candidates have serious criminal charges against their names. The phenomenon of criminal politicians therefore, straddles the rural-urban divide.  So why is it that an increasingly large number of politicians with criminal backgrounds are continuously contesting elections and a good number among them winning them too? Vaishnav brings this down to two important developments in Indian politics over the years. First is the increasing predominance of money in elections. On the basis of his research, he points out that “political parties prefer self-financing candidates who do not represent a drain on the finite party coffers but instead contribute ‘rents’ to the party”. Their criminal record notwithstanding, their vast resources, which enable them to meet the rising electoral expenditure, make them electorally competitive as well.  The second development Vaishnav highlights is the wide perception among voters that politicians with criminal backgrounds can “get things done”. This is not only from the service delivery point of view. In India’s ‘patronage democracy’ (Chandra 2004) mediated access to the state is a common feature and many times these representatives are expected to facilitate informal mediation to access the resources of the state on behalf of their voters.  In his research spanning over three parliamentary elections from 2004-2014, Vaishnav found that criminal politicians have an 18 percent chance of winning the next election,…